Explain compubox showing Pacquiao landing more punches. Let me guess Compubox is just bs right ? I've watched this fight 4 times now and theres just no way you can say confidently that one guy clearly won. I think people lean towards MArquez for several reasons: a) He was the significant underdog and did MUCH better then most people expected. People by nature root for the underdog and give him benefit of the doubt. b) he landed the 'biggest' punches in the fight c) Bias and emotion. If you look at the fight fairly it could have easily gone either way. If Marquez deserved the victory so did Pac by his own effort.
The fact these idiots are still making these threads because they can't sleep at night is hard evidence they don't belive Pac won lmao waking up in night sweats with new ideas on how Pac won
I actually felt bad for Pacquiao, because I like him too, and started looking for rounds to suggest it was closer. No matter what, many of the close rounds are edged by Marquez in clean punches landed. And yes, I think compubox can often be nonsense. I don't trust it one bit.
Well I agree but you could say the same thing the opposite way. Every round of the fight was pretty close except for a few. If you believe Marquez 'edged' it than that's not the definition of robbery, he just didnt get the decision.
If you edge at least 7 rounds, with no knockdowns, you win the fight. Rounds being close does not justify judges giving them to the slight loser of the rounds.
Absolutely right on the money. Marquez tired in the last four rounds and was swinging at air. Pac was still fresh, moving well and outboxing Marquez. Too bad for Marquez. It was the fight of his life. But he was showing his age at the end and his effort just wasn't enough.
Believe what you want. There is no wrong answer because all 3 matches were very competitive. I just think it's a little disturbing that JMM has been unlucky not once but twice. I felt he won both the second and third match. I'm ok with Pac winning once because the KD he scored seems like a convincing argument. Winning twice makes it look like greed and favoritism were the deciding factors.
Close rounds often boil down to interpretation and judges don't have the benefit of rewatching fights on youtube. But I dont agree that jmm absolutely won 7 rounds. You could certainly argue that and i wouldnt argue too much, but I think Pacquiao won enough rounds to win.